Book 4, Chapter 24

“He restored the battle in his madness.

53 “Shall we therefore call madness useful? Examine the definitions of courage: you will understand that it has no need of rage. Courage, then, is ‘a disposition of the soul obedient to the highest law in enduring things’; or ‘the steadfast preservation of judgment in facing and repelling things that seem fearful’; or ‘knowledge of things fearful, their opposites, and things to be wholly disregarded, preserving a steadfast judgment about them’; or, more briefly, as Chrysippus puts it. Those earlier definitions belonged to Sphaerus, a particularly skilled definer, the Stoics think. Indeed, they are nearly all alike, though some illuminate our shared conceptions more than others. How, then, does Chrysippus put it? ‘Courage,’ he says, ‘is knowledge of things to be endured, or a disposition of the soul which, in suffering and enduring, obeys the highest law without fear.’ We may attack these men as much as we please, as Carneades used to do: I am afraid they may be the only philosophers. Which of these definitions fails to unfold the conception of courage that we all possess, hidden and wrapped within us? Once that conception is unfolded, who would look for anything further in a warrior, commander, or orator, and think they could do nothing courageously without frenzy?

54 “What of the Stoics, who say that all unwise people are insane? Do they not reason from these very things? Take away disturbances, especially irascibility, and they will seem to be speaking monstrous nonsense. As it is, their argument is that they call all fools insane in the same way that they say all mud stinks. ‘But it does not always stink.’ Stir it, and you will smell it. Likewise, an irascible person is not always angry: provoke him, and you will see him rage. And what is this warlike anger like when it comes home, with a wife, with children, with the household? Is it useful then too? Is there anything a disturbed mind can do better than a steady one? Can anyone be angry without a disturbance of mind? Our countrymen were right, then: although all vices are faults of character, since none was uglier than irascibility, they called only the irascible ‘ill-tempered.’”

“He restored the battle while insane.

53 “Does that make madness a useful thing? Look closely at what courage means in these definitions; a bad temper won’t be needed. One calls it ‘a mental state obedient to the highest law in bearing what happens.’ Another says ‘keeping judgment firm while undertaking and resisting things that appear alarming.’ A third gives ‘knowledge of frightening things, of their opposites, and of things to ignore completely, while maintaining a firm judgment about them.’ Those were Sphaerus’ definitions; the Stoics think him exceptionally good at defining. They’re almost all alike overall, although different ones bring out different aspects of our shared ideas. Chrysippus makes it shorter. What does he say? ‘Courage means knowing what must be endured, or a mental state that follows the highest law fearlessly in suffering and holding out.’ Attack these men as freely as you like, as Carneades did: I’m afraid they may be the only real philosophers. Every one of these definitions reveals something of the idea of courage lying wrapped and hidden in all of us. Once revealed, would anyone demand an extra quality from fighting man, commander, or speaker, believing none could act courageously unless in a rage?

54 “The Stoics call all unwise people insane. Aren’t these their grounds? Imagine taking away disturbances, anger above all: their claim would sound monstrous. But as things stand, they explain it by comparing ‘All fools are insane’ to ‘All mud smells bad.’ ‘Not always, though.’ Disturb the mud and your nose will tell you. A bad-tempered person isn’t constantly angry either. Try provoking them and watch the frenzy appear. And this fighting anger—how does it behave back at home with wife, children, and slaves? Are its services needed there as well? Could agitation help the mind do anything better than steadiness would? Could anger occur with no mental agitation? Our people named things aptly. Every defect concerns character, but because anger was the ugliest, they reserved ‘ill-tempered’ for angry people alone.”